Talk:CovertAction Quarterly
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Defunkt?
editThe website displays the last edition, #78, being from 2005. Is this to be taken as a sgin that the publication is now defunkt? __meco 16:25, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Magazine's current status
editAny editors: I've enquired at book/magazine retailers several times in recent years & they always say it is listed as a current periodical but it's never in stock. I think for all practical purposes it should be considered defunct. I think a line or two should be added to the article about http://covertaction.org/ which hosts downloadable copies of all the issues from the magazine's inception in 1978 thru 2000. I've sent email to both the Covert Action website and the Cover Action Quarterly website for any clarifying information. The message to CAQ bounced "due to extended inactivity" at that mailbox. -Mal, 1 January 2008
- Contributor William Blum speaks about it as defunct here.John Z (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
- I've used that reference in the article. __meco (talk) 08:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
suggested move
editI suggest this page be moved to covertAction. Thanks
2A00:1FA0:499:6764:0:55:91CE:BF01 (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Use of Christopher Andrew source
editThis source makes the unsubstantiated assertion that CAQ was acting on behest of the KGB, even while also admitting that nobody at CAQ was aware of this. While it is certainly true that Russian active measures in regards to attacking US interests were well known, this claim is somewhat suspect given the known work of Ellen Ray and William Schaap who devoted their lives to serving the public good. Were they fellow travelers? Possibly, I have no idea, but looking at Andrew's book on this subject makes me question the claim even more. I am not certain Andrew's book is a reliable source given the huge number of unsual claims contained within it. Picking one at random, Andrew claims that allegations about Hoover's sexuality was KGB propaganda and has no basis in reality, but historians and biographers appear to think otherwise. I am wondering if Andrew is even a reliable source at this point. Viriditas (talk) 23:47, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Neighborhood Review: I believe you are the editor who added this info. Viriditas (talk) 23:49, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Christopher Andrew (historian) is an Emeritus Professor of Modern and Contemporary History at the University of Cambridge and a former Chair of the History Faculty at Cambridge University, Official Historian of the Security Service (MI5), Honorary Air Commodore of 7006 (VR) Intelligence Squadron in the Royal Auxiliary Air Force, Chairman of the Cambridge Intelligence Seminar, and former Visiting Professor at Harvard, Toronto and Canberra. He also served as co-editor of Intelligence and National Security, and as a presenter of BBC radio and TV documentaries, including the Radio Four series What If?. I think it's clear that he's a reliable source in the field of international relations and the history of intelligence services. Neighborhood Review (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)